Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the Registrar of the Karnataka Lokayukta, challenged two orders of the Karnataka Information Commission (KIC) dated 8.9.2011 and 9.2.2012, which directed the Lokayukta to provide information regarding assets and liabilities of MLAs, MLCs, and BBMP Corporators to the second respondent, an RTI activist. The second respondent had filed an application on 5.12.2010 seeking certified copies of asset statements submitted to the Lokayukta by all sitting MLAs, MLCs, and BBMP Corporators, as well as statements filed by MLAs regarding criminal cases pending against them. The designated officer under the RTI Act informed the applicant that under Rule 14 of the Karnataka RTI Rules, 2005, separate applications were required for each individual, and that BBMP Corporators were not required to file asset statements before the Lokayukta. The applicant then filed a complaint before the KIC, which allowed the complaint and directed the Lokayukta to provide the information. The Lokayukta challenged this order. The High Court examined whether the Lokayukta is a 'public authority' under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, and whether the information sought is 'held' by the Lokayukta or exempt from disclosure. The court held that the Lokayukta is not a public authority under the RTI Act as it is not owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government; it is a statutory body with independent functions. Further, the asset statements submitted by MLAs/MLCs under Section 12 of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act are held in a fiduciary capacity, and are exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. The court also noted that the KIC's order violated principles of natural justice as the third parties (MLAs/MLCs) were not given an opportunity of hearing. The court quashed the KIC orders and allowed the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Right to Information Act - Public Authority - Definition - Karnataka Lokayukta is not a 'public authority' under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005, as it is not a body owned, controlled or substantially financed by the government; it is a statutory body with independent functions. (Paras 10-12) B) Right to Information Act - Information Held - Fiduciary Relationship - Asset statements of MLAs/MLCs submitted to Lokayukta under Section 12 of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 are held in a fiduciary capacity, and are exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. (Paras 13-15) C) Right to Information Act - Application Procedure - Rule 14 of the Karnataka RTI Rules, 2005 requires separate applications for each individual when information pertains to multiple persons; a single composite application for information about all MLAs/MLCs is not maintainable. (Para 7) D) Right to Information Act - Third Party Information - Disclosure of asset statements of MLAs/MLCs without their consent or opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and Section 11 of the RTI Act. (Para 16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Karnataka Lokayukta is a 'public authority' under the RTI Act and whether it holds information regarding assets and liabilities of MLAs/MLCs in a fiduciary capacity, thus exempt from disclosure.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The orders of the Karnataka Information Commission dated 8.9.2011 and 9.2.2012 are quashed.
Law Points
- Right to Information Act
- 2005
- Section 2(f)
- Section 2(h)
- Section 2(j)
- Section 8(1)(e)
- Section 8(1)(j)
- Karnataka Lokayukta Act
- 1984
- Section 12
- Karnataka Right to Information Rules
- Rule 14
